Coup was never inevitable; |the military had a choice

While Songdej Praditsmanont’s letter reprises some familiar details of varying relevance, nothing in it refutes the key point that there was indeed a constitutionally legitimate government in place that was removed via a military coup. 

Yes, Yingluck and some ministers deemed to be involved in Thawil’s transfer were removed from office by the Constitution Court’s ruling, but that left both a replacement premier and all other ministers in office as a still-legitimate caretaker government. If it were otherwise, what legal logic was there in General Prayut asking Chaikasem Nitisiri “to confirm |that his government would not resign”? If there was no legal government, what resigning was there to do?

Whether that state of affairs actually meant “the country had become ungovernable” is a matter of opinion, as is the claim that “some believed civil war was inevitable”. 

Prayut and his backers had more than one choice available to them. For example, they could have acted in support of the government-in-place and maintained security up to and including the fresh elections already slated for July 2014. 

As we know, they chose not to, opting instead for the road to another full-fledged coup and tearing up the military-orchestrated 2007 constitution introduced after the previous coup.

Khun Songdej calls this situation “offering power to the Army on a silver platter”. It’s an interesting opinion and wryly expressed – as is “Never give the Army a chance to override a political solution.” Given the Thai military’s long coup track record, it’s surely also a moot point as to just how much is enough “chance” (or excuse?) for them to mount yet another take-over of power.

Steve CM